HERO OR HUMBLE SERVANT? PART II

Since Bruce Roemmelt provided a detailed reply to the first post (HERO OR HUMBLE SERVANT?), I think it appropriate to give his reply at least as much visibility as the original post.  So here it is.

Tom/KG,

sorry for the late response but this has been a very busy weekend.

this might be dangerous, but since i’m so late to the game i thought i would weigh in of a few points in your post.

“Different jobs emphasize different character traits”
at the time of the SCC hearing i was challenging Bob for the VA HOD 13th. i felt that the voters could read our statements and make up their minds on who they wanted to send to richmond to deal with the SCC and Dominion.

if Bob wanted to get ‘coached up’ on engineering issues he could have asked the Dominion folks about issues when he’s been in thier box for the last several Redskin – Cowboys games at FedEx.

i got my information from PEC’s web site where they did independent research and also quoted Dominion’s proposal directly.

i have a bias for personal responsiblity. it’s not rocket surgery for us to drive slower, conserve energy and urge our energy providers to push demand management.

i also am right in line with Jim Bacon who wants to develop a power generation centric energy system as opposed to a grid centric one.

look i was a fire fighter for 30 years not an electrical engineer, but this is about common sense solutions to problems. i really though my solutions were more pragmatic and could avoid the construction of the power line. Bob’s perspective was much more focused on “here’s what Dominion needs to do during and after they build their line”.

the other comment i wanted to address was your quote “In olden days, kings often presumed to tell other people how to run their business. ” i found myself mentally picturing Bob as the king telling people how to run their personal lives. this is an area where he has had an effect.

Tom you got real close to some kind of Liberatarian perspective there. i know it wasn’t intended to “keep our government out of our homes” but it is the natural extension in my mind.

let’s all be known for our accomplishments – and our failures. i think it was Ceasar who said, “the good men do die with them, the bad lingers on.” as a citizen i want my legislator to solve problems that affect us all. education, health care, transportation, growth management. if we need someone to just be about being on the soapbox, we have op-ed writers in the papers. or bloggers.

let’s face it. bob is principled, but he’s ineffective as a legislator. having his own caucus strip him of committee leadership and give the power to much junior legislators robs us in the 13th of effective legislation.

contrast Bob’s power to Colgan’s even when he was in the minority. huge difference.

and regarding the title of the post i hope you weren’t referring to me as a hero. i’m just a retired fire fighter who thinks he might be able to serve his fellow citizens a bit longer.

b

(from here)

I appreciate the fact Roemmelt both took the time to reply, and that he did not mistake the use of the term “hero” in the title as an insult.  When we engage in debate, it is too easy to become hostile.

Roemmelt and Marshall no doubt find themselves far apart in many ways.  In fact, there exists relatively few places where men who so much disagree could still have a civil conversation and debate.  We each carry with us our own world view, our own moral code, our own purpose in this life.  What makes religious freedom and democratic government possible in this nation is the sheer diversity of world views, moral codes, and purposes.   Without such diversity, the temptation for the majority to dictate its own world view, moral code, and purpose would be almost irresistable. 

Even so we have strange ironies.  Roemmelt recognizes “bob is principled”, and at the same time, he still thinks “he’s ineffective as a legislator”.  Is Marshall ineffective?  Does that not depend on whose standard we are using.  Which world view?  Whose moral code?  Which purpose is served?

From the perspective of the people who voted for Bob Marshall, he is doing great.  Marshall has done all his supporters could have asked — so much so that even his opponents recognize that Marshall has behaved in accordance with his principles.  How many of us will go to the grave with as much said of us?

That said I intend no ridicule or sarcasm at Roemmelt expense, and I hope my criticisms do not bite or cut more than they inform.  As I suggested before, I used the term “hero” when I referred to Bruce Roemmelt without sarcasm.  After September 11, who does not recognize the service that our firefighters provide our communities and our nation?   Running for public office is no less a commitment.  Anyone who does so puts themselves and their family in the public eye.  Undoubtedly, the seriousness of Roemmelt’s campaign has most certainly earned Marshall’s respect. 

So I will leave off with a quotation I copied from the Skeptical Observer.

“It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.” – Theodore Roosevelt